Global Protest against Geocide

On the Subject of the Utopian Demand for Global Protest

against Geocide

Suzana Marjanić

Although Al Gore set out a host of unpleasant truths about the planetary

phenomenon of global warming in his recent book An Inconvenient Truth

(2006), surprisingly enough, as PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of

Animals) pointed out, he still did not expound at any length on the fact that

global warming is also caused by the meat industry, which is one of the major

factors contributing to the environmental disaster. Namely, as emphasised by

the prominent geophysicists Gidon Eshel and Pamela Martin of the University

of Chicago, the greenhouse-gas emissions from livestock reared for human

consumption make a major contribution to global warming, and a transition

from the "standard American diet" to vegan eating habits would be a far more

productive way of reducing global warming than even a changeover from

standard automobiles to the more efficient hybrid models (cf. Gidon Eshel,

Pamela Martin: "Diet, Energy and Global Warming". Earth Interactions, Vol.

10, 2006; http://blog.peta.org/archives/2007/03/clearing_a_few.php?

c=weekly_enews).

It should be stressed that 17 percent of methane emissions in Europe derive

from livestock manure. In other words, an adult cow produces some 60 litres

of methane per day. And further: tropical rainforests are being destroyed at

such a rate that each year a further area the size of Britain disappears,

largely with the purpose of obtaining pasture land for livestock rearing or for

cropland to grow Soya for livestock feed (cf. the documentary film Devour the

Earth, The Vegetarian Society, UK, 1995). One can link the hushing-up of the

truth about global warming mentioned above connected with the (mass)

farming industry with another example that demonstrates the cynical

strategy of the powers-that-be: the American oil company, Exxon Mobil, the

largest and consequently the most powerful one, paid lobbyist groups US$ 16

Million to spread the false information that greenhouse-gasses did not have

an influence on the global warming of the Earth.

Journal for Faith, Spirituality and Social Change. Vol.1.2 151

Admittedly, the title of this paper could, no doubt, be regarded as having a Utopian

tendency that could easily seem paradoxical. Namely, while I am opening up the

issue of the Utopian demand for global protest against Geocide on the one hand, on

the other it is obvious that global protest nowadays is absolutely unattainable. Global

protest would need to be revolutionary, but revolutions – at least those in the West –

have lost their former edge. The post-modern revolutions are lead under the current

grey and black conditions of neo-liberal capitalism, in which the members of the new

Holy Trinity are the International Monetary Fund (the IMF), the World Bank and

the World Trade Organisation (the WTO) (cf. Šimleša 2006: 36).

To recall one of many paradoxes: the United States that supports, in principle,

documents about the preservation of the Planet's climate, is still not prepared to

prove that in practice. In other words, it was established at the meeting held in

Potsdam on March 16 and 17, 2007, which brought together the environmental

ministers from the G8 group of countries, that the United States was blocking

progress on questions connected with preservation of Nature throughout the world.

The delegate from the United States said that his country could not reduce carbon

emissions into the atmosphere. One of the reasons underlying Washington's refusal

to sign the Kyoto Protocol lies in the fact that the growing Asian powers – India and

China – are not obliged under the existing Protocol to reduce their emissions of

greenhouse gases (cf. "Globalno zatopljenje"/ "Global Warming", http).1 Thus, due to

the numerous paradoxes connected with Geocide, the demand in the paper's title

remains a mere Utopian tendency.2

On the trail of the Geocide in question, allow me to mention only some of the

animals that have become extinct during the 20th century, according to the

information presented in her popular book Amazing Animal Facts and Lists (2003)

by Sarah Khan: the Pyrenean Ibex was last seen in the year 2000, the Javanese Tiger

in 1980, the Berber Lion in 1960, the Japanese Sea Lion in 1961, the Tasmanian

Tiger-Wolf in 1936, the Martinique Muskrat in 1902, etc. Today's most threatened

mammals include the Baiji Dolphins, whose population in the wild was less than 40

individuals in 2001; the Seychelles Sheath-tailed Bat population numbered less than


50 individuals; there were less than 60 Javanese Rhinoceros living in the wild in

2001 (cf. Khan 2005: 56-57); and it is estimated that there are fewer than forty Amur

Leopards left living the wild ("Amur Leopard", http), etc.3 I shall refrain from further

enumeration since I am aware, as has been mentioned above, that the demand for

global protest against Geocide is still, despite all the obvious Geocidal facts, merely

Utopian. Nevertheless, we shall continue further with the paradoxical effect.

Shocking statistical data reveal that animal and plant species are disappearing

throughout the world today one thousand times faster than ever during the last 65

million years and that we bring about the extinction of 100 species a day, as Al Gore

pointed out in his book Earth in the Balance: Ecology and the Human Spirit (1992).

In his article Age of Grief, the anarcho-primitivist, John Zerzan, warns that a

considerably higher number of plant and animal species are being destroyed: the

Earth is being exposed to the highest rate of mass extinction over the last 50 000

years – "50,000 plant and animal species disappear each year (World Wildlife Fund,

1996)" (Zerzan, http). Or we could add, as mentioned by the German environmental

minister at the recent, above-mentioned meeting in Potsdam: 150 species are being

lost to extinction every day (cf. "G8 assesses cost of species lost", http). Or, as Ed

Ayres pointed out in his book God’s Last Offer: Negotiating for a Sustainable

Future (1999): we destroy three plant or animal species every hour, while we destroy

a forest the size of a soccer pitch every second (cf. Šimleša 2006:32).

Here I would mention, as was emphasised by PETA (People for the Ethical

Treatment of Animals), that in his most recent book, An Inconvenient Truth (2006),

Al Gore still did not expound at any length on the fact that global warming is also

caused by the meat industry, which is one of the major factors contributing to the

environmental disaster. Admittedly, Al Gore warned that 60% of the methane gas

that is currently in the atmosphere results from human activities: it is produced by

waste disposal, livestock rearing, the burning of fossil fuels, waste water purification,

and other industrial activities, and the liquid manure resulting from mass livestock

rearing is stored in giant tanks that emit methane gas (Gore 2007:28). Namely, as

emphasised by the prominent geophysicists Gidon Eshel and Pamela Martin of the

University of Chicago, the greenhouse-gas emissions from livestock reared for

human consumption make a major contribution to global warming, and a transition


from the "standard American diet" to vegan eating habits would be a far more

productive way of reducing global warming than even a changeover from standard

automobiles to the more efficient hybrid models (Eshel, Martin 2006:1-17; cf. Brook,

http; cf. "Clearing a Few Things Up for Al Gore", http).4

It should be stressed that 17% of methane emissions in Europe derive from

animal manure (Lay, Kufrin, Puđak 2007:19). In other words, an adult cow produces

some 60 litres of methane per day.5 And further: tropical rainforests are being

destroyed at such a rate that each year a further area the size of Britain disappears,

largely to achieve the end of obtaining pasture land for livestock rearing or for

cropland to grow Soya for livestock feed (cf. the documentary film Devour the Earth,

The Vegetarian Society, UK, 1995). We can refer to the way Christopher C. Horner

speaks of methane in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to Global Warming

and Environmentalism (2007), which Senator James Ihofe defined with the

following sentence: "A definite resource to debunk global warming alarmism", and

that in only one place: methane "comes from decaying plants, seeps from swamps,

bogs, rice paddies, and leaks out the front and back ends of masticating animals"

(Horner 2007:68). Further, in a footnote that ostensibly "clarifies" the demonstrated

lack of definition in identifying methane as one of the greenhouse gases, and which,

one should not forget, is about 21 times more effective at trapping heat than carbon

dioxide as follows: "By the way, Man is blamed under the Kyoto Protocol for animal

flatulence and, e.g., rice paddy gases, because we eat the product of both of these

methane sources" (Horner 2007:313). In reading his book, one should be aware that

Horner is a Senior Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute and Counsel to the

Cooler Heads Coalition.6

Briefly and picturesquely said, according to the report of the Center for

International Forestry Research, cattle-farm owners are converting the Amazon

rainforests into minced meat (Brook, http). Or, to put it even more colourfully, since

pictures are sometimes more effective than words, as pointed out by Juliet Gellatley:

when the astronauts looked at Earth from the boundless expanse of Space, the Great

Wall of China was the only man-made structure that they could see with the naked

eye, however, they saw another anthropogenic product when in Space during the

1980s – a huge cloud of smoke rising from the burning Amazon jungle (Gellatley


http://blog.peta.org/archives/2007/03/clearing_a_few.php

2001: 72). Consequently, while the rainforests are being consumed by fire in order to

create pasture land, all the CO2 that has accumulated in the trees for more than one

hundred years is being released, contributing by its emission to global warming and/

or what deep ecologists call global frying. According to collected data, this process of

deforestation alone causes 1/5 of the total global warming of the planet (Gellatley

2001:72). So it is that Nepal, according to information presented in the documentary

film Devour the Earth (The Vegetarian Society, UK, 1995), has lost around half of its

forests over the last twenty years to just such livestock rearing, while the burning off

of vegetation and the release of methane make the second largest contribution to the

greenhouse effect.7

What is really outrageous in this process is that cynical attempts are being

made by the powers-that-be to conceal the actual facts about global warming –

although it should be pointed out once again that this is an euphemism and that we

are really speaking of global frying – as just once more ecological myth, as otherwise

claimed by Bjørn Lomborg, "a former Greenpeace member and generally Central

ideal for a loopy environmentalist" (Horner 2007: 38). He arrived at the mindless

oxymoron that, according to the greater part of data, the Earth is not becoming

sicker, but is, indeed, more healthy (here, I would like to draw your attention to the

last two sentences of his book).8 To quote one such questionable conclusion:

Basically, however, our forests are not under threat. In a historical

perspective, about 20 percent of all forest has been lost, while about a

third of the world's land mass is still covered by forest, and since World

War II this area has not changed much. Tropical forests are being

deforested, though on levels much below the feared 1.5-4.6 percent per

year – the newest data from the FAO indicate an annual rate of 0.46

percent (Lomborg 2007: 117).

Andrew K. Jorgenson draws particular attention to the fact that the production of

beef and veal – I am aware that these are specistic terms used in the meat industry –

oil and natural gas, and biomass energy all positively affect methane emissions

intensity. "Some evidence is found indicating that cereal production, including rice,

positively affects methane emissions per capita" (Jorgenson 2006: 1793). Further,

this scientist warns that export-oriented cattle and cereal production have increased


substantially in less-developed countries, and paradoxically, that "the majority of

goods produced in these sectors are consumed in more-developed countries, which

highlights the outsourcing of consumption-based environmental costs" (ibid.: 1793).9

In this vein, I would like to draw attention to the facts cited by Bruce

Friedrich, vice-president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA):

A November 2006 report published by the U.N.'s Food and Agriculture

Organization (FAO) revealed that the livestock sector generates more

greenhouse gas emissions – 18 percent – than transportation. The FAO

also reported that the livestock industry is responsible for 37 percent of

anthropogenic (generated by human activity) methane and 65 percent of

anthropogenic nitrous oxide, both of which have a higher "global

warming potential" than carbon dioxide. The FAO also blamed the

livestock sector for heavy deforestation, and according to the World

Resources Institute, deforestation is responsible for approximately 20

percent of all global warming emissions (Friedrich, http).

Apart from that, the manure that is spread on crop land increases global warming

since it produces nitrous oxide (dinitrogen oxide, dinitrogen monoxide) – a gas of

major greenhouse potential (GWP=310), which is more deadly than CO2, is long-

lasting and is highly concentrated in the atmosphere, while, at the same time,

agriculture is responsible for almost 80% of nitrous oxide emissions. The activities

that produce it are primarily the use of nitrogen in man-made fertilisers and in the

process of livestock rearing (Lay, Kufrin, Puđak 2007: 19-20).

In Croatia, only animal rights groups such as, for example, the Animal Friends

Croatia (Prijatelji životinja) organisation from Zagreb, warn us of this threat – on

their webpage (www.prijatelji-zivotinja.hr/index.en.php) – where they stress that

the meat-farming industry is making a major contribution to global warming. In

addition, according to information in the documentary film Devour the Earth

(1995), the world now (this documentary film was produced in 1995) contains 3

times as many farm animals as humans. And further: "Livestock have huge appetites

for grass and corn and wheat, so much so that nearly 80% of all agricultural land in


http://www.prijatelji-zivotinja.hr/index.en.php

Britain is used to support them" (Devour the Earth, The Vegetarian Society, UK,

1995).

Animal Theology: Briefly on Dominionism and Misothery

Besides placing the emphasis in this text on the influence of the meat industry and,

consequently, conventional agriculture, on global warming which, it seems to me, is

a suppressed theme in the (reversed) media view of the world (namely, the main

sources of pollution, and thus global warming, are usually cited as being industry,

transport and energy production),10 on the other hand (that actually consists of the

same cynical face or mask of the problem in question) I would also like to consider

the ambivalent stance towards the life of animals in the Christian worldview, which

is reputed to be the foundation of Western spirituality. In the process, this

ambivalence on the part of Christianity towards nonhumans is usually designated at

the contrast between the worldviews of St Thomas Aquinas and St Francis of Assisi,

although, as established by Peter Singer in his book Animal Liberation (1975),

Francis of Assisi did, in fact, accept the anthropocentric view that all creatures exist

for the wellbeing of Humankind (Ryder 2000: 28-29).11

Namely, despite the dominant anthropocentrism of the Christian Church in

its stance towards animals, there are also animalistic counter-currents in

Christianity that promote animal rights as is shown, for example, by the case of

Christa Blanke, a former Lutheran pastor who founded the Animals' Angels

organisation in March 1998 (cf. Patterson 2002: 222-229). We will pause briefly to

look at the Animals' Angels organisation – the international animal welfare

organisation, based in Freiburg, whose main activity is the monitoring and

overseeing of transport of animals intended for slaughter, as well as attempting to

ensure enforcement of regulations regarding rest periods, and feed and water during

their horrifying transport through Europe, prior to their arrival at the last station –

the abattoir. The long-term aim of Animals' Angels is, of course, the abolition of

long-distance transportation of farm animals. The Animals' Angels organisation

itself draws attention on its web-page to the following: "Worldwide, 50 billion

animals (aquatic animals not included) are slaughtered in slaughterhouses every

year. Prior to slaughter, every animal is transported at least once" ("Animal

Transports", http).12


Christa Blanke pointed out that her focus on improving animal transport

conditions was only the first step in the attempt to ban the meat trade, while also

mentioning that Animals' Angels oppose fully the slaughter of animals: "(...) but if

they are fated to be slaughtered, then it should be done where they are raised"

(Christa Blanke, according to Patterson 2002: 225). One example on their web-page

states: "Every year, 30,000 horses are sent from Poland to Italy, e.g. Bari. Distance:

2,000 kilometres" ("Animal Transports", http).13

Photograph downloaded from the www.animals-angels.org/Animal

%20Transports,177.html web-page.

In all of that, Christa Blanke diagnoses our human, far too human ethical

schizophrenia towards animals (cf. Patterson 2002: 225). At the beginning of the

1990s, she wrote an article entitled That God Also Loves His Creatures Who Have

Feathers, Fur, Claws, Horn and Quills: Reflections on the Church and the Course of

the World in which she stressed that the Church Synod held in Glauberg was

discussing whether a sentence or two that mentioned the Jews as the Chosen People

of God should be added to their texts. Christa Blanke concluded that the Church had

not undertaken anything to help the Jews during the Holocaust, so that the

discussion applying cynical strategies of ostensible care ethics was taking place fifty

years too late (cf. Patterson 2002: 227). Consequently, "130 years ago, the Church

remained silent about the slave trade because they were only black people. Fifty

years ago, the Church remained silent because they were only Jews. Today, the


http://www.animals-angels.org/Animal Transports,177.html

http://www.animals-angels.org/Animal Transports,177.html

Church remains silent because they are only animals" (Christa Blanke, according to

Patterson 2002: 228).14 It should be mentioned, as pointed out by Charles Patterson

in his book Eternal Treblinka: Our Treatment of Animals and the Holocaust

(2002), that after numerous Church publications – including the progressive Roman

Catholic newspaper Publik-Forum – had rejected publication of this Blanke article, it

was finally published by Gaia, the animal rights/environmental magazine (Patterson

2002: 270).

A few additional words about the animal theology of Christa Blanke: from the

moment of her ordainment, Christa Blanke raised awareness in her Lutheran Church

on the contemporary holocaust of the animals (the syntagma that Christa Blanke

herself uses). So in 1986, she co-officiated at a church service against experiments on

animals in front of the premises of the pharmaceutical giant, Hoechst AG. In the

same year, she collected 30,000 signatures on a petition against using eggs from

industrial farms in Church institutions, and submitted the petition to the state

governing body of the Lutheran Church in Hessen-Nassau. Furthermore, on July 10,

1988 she held the first televised church service for animals under the title "Who is

My Neighbour?", which was broadcast live on German National Television (ZDF).

Together with her husband Michael, she founded the Action for Church and Animals

(Aktion Kirche und Tiere) in 1989, so as to include the remainder of the clergy in

activism on behalf of animal rights. Namely, as an ordained pastor of the Lutheran

church, Christa Blanke tried to draw the Church into the animal rights movement;

however, as she says, she did not receive the support of her Church and as she put it

"I found myself deserted by my fellow clergy" (Patterson 2002: 223).

Let us turn briefly now to the status of animal rights activism in Croatia,

which lags behind that of western-European countries as regards the dates when

activist associations were founded. Animal rights activism in Croatia can be spoken

of in the true sense only after the year 2000, when organisations were founded that

were dedicated to the promotion of animal rights and/or animal liberation. The

oldest and still most active association today is the Animal Friends Croatia (Prijatelji

životinja) organisation founded in 2001, while other organisations based on

ostensibly different precepts were founded later, such as, for instance, Animal Voice

(Glas životinja) in 2002 and the Animal Liberation organisation (Oslobođenje

životinja) in 2004. And while Animal Friends Croatia and Animal Liberation are


both oriented towards public advocacy, education, lobbying and other legal

pressures on the institutions of authority, Animal Liberation is also defined by

anarchist strategies and the principles applied by the Animal Liberation Front, while

Animal Voice is inspired in its animalistic activities by Christian ideas or, more

precisely, by the original ideas of early Christianity (cf. Jurić 2006: 19), and

collaborates with the Universal Life religious community, which defines itself as a

society of original Christian citizens (the Original Christian movement). In the

framework of its ethical animal concerns, Universal Life emphasises the content of

documents from Antiquity written by individual ecclesiastical and non-ecclesiastical

authors – particularly St Jerome and his Adversus Jovinianum – as the most

reliable proof that Christ was, in fact, a vegetarian (cf. Hoblaj, Vitković 2007).15

By the above, I once again open up the question that has been recycled

numerous times: why is it that the Church – here I am thinking primarily of the main

current of the Christian Church as a model of Western spirituality – negates the

ethical consideration of animal life, which Christa Blanke gives, as I have already

said, the syntagma of the contemporary holocaust of the animals? (cf. Patterson

2002: 229). Let us attempt to cast light on this obscure question from one particular

viewpoint. Namely, Jim Mason, an author, speaker, journalist, environmentalist and

attorney who focuses on human/animal concerns, sees the basis of human

domination over animals and Nature in the worldviews of the Judaism and

Christianity that make up the ideological core of Western culture, and calls this

attitude dominionism – "the view that human beings have a God-given power or

right to use and control the living world for their exclusive benefit". Similarly, in

analogy with the words misogyny and racism, and in the context of this

anthropocentric domination, as well as in analogy with the concept of speciesism –

originally used by Richard D. Ryder, and presented by him in 1970 in a leaflet of the

same name – Jim Mason conceived the neologism misothery, which "literally means

hatred and contempt for animals and, by extension, the natural world as a whole,

especially its animal-like aspects" (Mason 2006: 180).16

In other words, Christianity introduced to the Roman world the idea inherited

from Jewish tradition of the uniqueness of the human species. However, it also


insisted upon it more forcefully because of the significance that Christianity attached

to the immortality of the human soul, which is how the characteristically Christian

idea on the sacred nature of each human life came about (Singer 1998: 160) – but the

sacred nature of only human life.17 Thus, Christianity negates the existence of the

animal soul; furthermore, Christianity emphasises that human beings, unlike the

members of the animal world, are made in God's image and, finally, Christianity

proclaims that people are all-powerful and have dominance over all of Nature, by

which mainstream Christianity provides an ideological confirmation of

anthropocentrism and the worldview established by St Thomas Aquinas, whose

ethical precepts regarding non-human animals are representative of Roman Catholic

philosophy, paradoxically enough, even today (cf. Singer 1998: 162).18

Luckily however, certain Christian religious communities such as, for

example, the abovementioned original Christian community, Universal Life,

demonstrate understanding for animal rights. At the same time, the Reverend

Andrew Linzey, an Anglican clergyman and professor, theologist and writer, who is

also known internationally as an authority on Christianity and on animals and is

director of the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics that was opened in 2006, points out

the already 2000-year old paradox that biblical interpretation fundamentally ignores

the message of radical vegetarianism in Genesis Ch. 1 (cf. Linzey 1995: 125-137).19

Namely, in the first chapter of Genesis God instructs man to be vegetarian, which

means that Adam and Eve were indeed vegetarians (cf. Solomon 2003: 222). It is

only after the Flood that God gives Noah permission to eat meat (Linzey 1995: 128;

Ryder 2000: 24). Thus, Jews and Christians allowed their texts such as Genesis to be

interpreted as a permit for tyranny over animals, although Genesis Ch. 1, Verses

29-30 proclaims vegetarianism. To quote the mentioned biblical instruction: And

God said "Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed which is upon the face

of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit; you shall have them for food.

And to every beast of the earth, and to every bird of the air, and to everything that

creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green

plant for food" (Genesis Ch. 1, Verses 29-30).20

We can conclude this brief consideration of dominionism and misothery with

one more paradox. Despite irrefutable and, unfortunately, dominant Christian

anthropocentrism, an "underground" animalistic current has always existed in


Christianity that has promoted animal rights,21 and this very current has been

particularly deserving of credit, as Richard D. Ryder shows, for the formation of the

contemporary vegetarian movement. Within this framework, Ryder stresses how the

Englishman, William Cowherd, made vegetarianism obligatory in his Bible Christian

Church based near Manchester. Similarly, Cowherd's follower, William Metcalfe,

who migrated to Philadelphia, became the founder of vegetarianism in America

(Ryder 2000: 92). Furthermore: "the word vegetarian appeared in 1842 and came

into widespread use after the establishment of the Vegetarian Society in England in

1847 by secular followers of Metcalfe" (ibid.: 93).22

In conclusion, or the very end, or on global warming

After a digression on ambivalent consideration of the life of animals in the Christian

worldview, I shall once again round out this brief dystopian tale with global

warming. The major conclusion of the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on

Climate Change (the IPCC), which was held in Paris from January 28 to February 2,

2007, was that anthropocentric activities are the main cause of global climate

change. We could add with some irony that this conclusion must have been arrived

at with considerable difficulty. In this way, scientists have finally put environmental

protection in first place in political discussions. It has been established that, due to

the burning of fossil fuels and the resultant growth in greenhouse gasses (carbon

dioxide, methane, nitrous oxides, etc.), the average temperature on Earth has risen

from 0.4 to 0.8 degrees Centigrade over the last 100 years. Furthermore, according

to calculations carried out on computer models based on various projected scenarios,

ranging from the conservative to the catastrophic, it is evident that temperatures will

increase from between 2 and 7 degrees Centigrade in the coming 100 years

(Petrovčić 2007: 10).

It is an established fact that global warming has been hushed up for years

because of oil company interests. To give just one example: the American oil

company, Exxon Mobil, the largest and consequently the most powerful one, paid

lobbyist groups US$ 16 Million to spread the false information that greenhouse gases

did not have an influence on the global warming of the Earth. Furthermore, the

United States Administration seems to have no intention of ratifying the Kyoto


Protocol, which obligates its signatories to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 5.2

percent from their 1990 level by 2010 (ibid.). So one particular scientific current

refutes the actual facts about global warming, while in that process its

representatives speak of a myth invented by the Greens. For example, an

atmospheric physicist and professor of meteorology, Dr Richard Lindzen, quoted in

his book by Christopher Horner in illustration of his ideas, is the spokesperson for

those who reject the theories on global warming and ascribe to the effects of mass

hysteria the facts about the phenomenon (Lindzen 2007: 70). It is worth mentioning

that Richard Lindzen, who is usually introduced in newspaper interviews as "an

expert in atmospheric science", emphasises that "the essential question about global

warming is not who caused it, but whether it is significant" (ibid.). It seems to me

that steering the issue away from the cause of global warming (showing that Lindzen

is not at all interested in whom or what caused global warming and I should add, in

the process, that if the cause does not interest him, then it is obvious that he is not

interested in how to prevent it) can link those facts that connect Lindzen with the

fact that he appears as a corrupted spokesperson of the oil industry and that his work

is financed by certain pharmaceutical companies (cf. Lindzen 2007: 72).23 In his

book, Christopher C. Horner speaks of the Kyoto Protocol, in his view, as "a fruitless,

failed treaty" since, according to the information garnered from the European

Environment Agency, Europe's greenhouse gas emissions have been rising three

times as fast as those of the U.S. since 2000 (Horner 2007: 271-272). It is interesting

to see that this author mentions this indefinite piece of information a few pages later:

"Europe's greenhouse gases are rising many times faster than ours" (ibid.: 292).

Consequently, the United State, as the country which is the leading emitter of

greenhouse gases into Planet Earth's atmosphere (namely, the United State produces

24% of the world's carbon dioxide emissions!) has not until today, nor does it seem

to intend to do so, at least while President G.W. Bush's Administration is in power,

to ratify the Kyoto Protocol.24 It should be added that such countries also include

Australia (cf. Lay, Kufrin, Puđak 2007: 49). Namely, the United States, Australia,

and some small countries, including Kazakhstan and, until recently, Croatia, have

refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. I would like to add the most recent information

related to Croatia: the Croatian Sabor [Parliament] ratified the Kyoto Protocol on

April 27, 2007, thus becoming the 170th country to accept the document.25 Croatia,


as mentioned in the Eko revija journal, had not been able to do this previously

because of the highly unfavourable calculation of permitted greenhouse gas

emissions defined in the Protocol, which would have aggravated energy development

and development of the entire economy, and involved high additional costs (D.L.

2007: 11). By this ratification, Croatia accepted the obligation to reduce its

greenhouse emissions by 5% by the year 2012.26 In November, 2006 Croatia was

authorised additional emission of carbon dioxide by 3.5 million tonnes at the

meeting of the signatories of and participants in the Kyoto Protocol held in Nairobi

(the twelfth Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention

on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol, Nairobi, November 6 to 17, 2006). This is

widely considered to be an ideal objective, and so, according to the Kyoto Protocol,

Croatia must not exceed the level of 33 400 000 CO2 eq greenhouse gas emissions by

2012 (Lay, Kufrin, Puđak 2007: 52). However, it should be added that Greenpeace

believes that the Protocol's objectives have been set too modestly, and that they will

not ensure any major steps forward (cf. "Protokol iz Kyota"/ "Kyoto Protocol", http).

Or, as Ed Ayres has pointed out – subsequently to the Kyoto Protocol, paradoxically,

nothing would really changed: "(...) the construction of new coal-burning power

plants would continue in China as though nothing had happened; hundreds of new

oil wells would be drilled in the oceans; millions of new gas-guzzling sport utility

vehicles, vans, pickup trucks, and luxury cars would continue to be sold, most of

them with even lower fuel efficiency than a decade earlier; and the spike of carbon

gas would continue to rise" (Ayres 2000: 24-25).

As shown by Al Gore, China and the United States, which contribute most to

greenhouse gas emissions, are followed by rural Indonesia, which emits "3.3 billion

tons (almost 3 billion metric tonnes) of carbon dioxide annually – almost entirely

from deforestation" (Walsh 2007: 46). Namely, deforestation is responsible "for

about 20% of global carbon emissions, more than from all the cars, boats and planes

in the world", and the top 5 deforesters are Brazil, Indonesia, Sudan, Burma and

Zambia (ibid.).

Among other, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change also assessed

the catastrophic consequences of global warming. We shall mention only a few of

them here since the emphasis in the title is the Utopian demand for global protest


against Geocide: in less than twenty years, hundreds of millions of people in Africa

and tens of millions in Latin America will be enduring water shortages, while, on the

other hand, tens of millions of people will be left homeless each year because their

homes will disappear in great floods. By the year 2050, it will be possible to see polar

bears only in zoos, since their natural habitats will have disappeared; according to

the above assessment, the polar icecaps will have melted by then. Further, by the

year 2080, Humankind or, more precisely, hundreds of millions of people, will be

facing famine. And the co-author of the draft document issued by the authoritative

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Terry Root of Stanford University,

said: "We truly are standing at the edge of mass extinction" of species (cf. "Draft...",

http). For example, Juliet Gellatley warns that perhaps the most crucial question is

that of what will be happening at the top and at the base of our globe. Namely, there

are great expanses of frozen land surfaces around the North and the South Poles. The

tundra contains millions of tonnes of frozen methane and, as the tundra warm up, so

will the methane gradually be released. It seems that it will be impossible to halt this

process once it begins (Gellatley 2001: 73-74).

One must also bear in mind the future wars that will be fought over water. The

ecologist and ecofeminist, Vandana Shiva, who is widely regarded as having a

leading place in Hindu ecotheology, drew attention in book Water Wars: Pollution,

Profits and Privatization (2002) to what is, otherwise, a very obvious fact – in the

ecological context of water wars, the terrorists are not only those hiding out in

Afghanistan's caves; some of them take refuge in corporate conference rooms and

behind the free trade regulations established by the WTO, the North American Free

Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and The Free Trade Area of the Americas (the FTAA),

since destruction of water resources, forest confluences and flowing water is a form

of terrorism, just as it is a mode of terrorism to block the access of the poor to water

by privatising water distribution and by polluting springs and rivers. Apart from

that, several wars have already been fought over water.27 According to Vandana

Shiva's observations, "the war between Israelis and Palestinians is to some extent a

war over water. The river under contention is the Jordan River, used by Israel,

Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and the West Bank. (...) While only 3 percent of the Jordan

basin lies in Israel, the river provides for 60 percent of its water needs" (Shiva 2006:

98).


In addition, the Israeli war in Lebanon, apart from the horrifying number of

persons killed, left behind one of the greatest ecological catastrophes in the history of

the Mediterranean. By bombing the power plant in the town of Jiyyeh, the Israelis

caused the spill into the sea of 15,000 tonnes of crude oil and the burning of some

25,000 tonnes of that black mass. It is estimated that more people will die from the

after-effects than those who were killed during the war ("Najveća ekološka katastrofa

u povijesti Libanona"/ "The greatest ecological catastrophe in Lebanon's history",

http).

To close and conclude: I have arranged the facts given here in collage form

under the title syntagma of the Utopian demand for global change of the world, and I

see the authentic role for all modes of religion only in their ethical concerns about

Geocide, rather than religions figuring as secure, ideological props for war conflicts

as, for example, when it is a matter of ethnic nations identifying the religious and the

national, as occurred in the recent and far from illustrious past of the Balkans (cf.

Peraica 2003). In keeping with the above, I would draw attention to the cautionary

statement by Derrick Jensen on how we cannot simultaneously exploit Planet Earth

and live upon it (Jensen 2007: 18). However, it is obvious that the majority of

human Earthlings deeply believe in this paradox, while the various religions, which

are theocentric, anthropocentric and equally androcentric on this issue, keep

SILENT about it from their pulpits.28

Translated by Nina H. Antoljak


1

Notes

N

We can refer to Christopher C. Horner's cynical comment regarding the countries that are not subject to the obligations imposed by the Kyoto Protocol: "(...) the greens are happy to exempt from Kyoto some rather industrialized countries such as China, India, Brazil, and South Korea – countries who any year now will take over as the dominant 'greenhouse gas' emitters" (Horner 2007: 53). And a variation on this comment: "Kyoto exempts major developing nations and 'top ten' emitters such as China, India, and South Korea, Mexico, Brazil, and others are free riders and happily intend to stay so" (ibid.: 265).

We can add the view from the other side, from the aspect of developing countries, which equally ignore ecological issues and the Geocide connected with them: Ma Kai, the director of the Chinese National Development and Reform Commission, stressed that "climate change is used unjustifiably as an excuse to attempt to limit the advancement of developing countries" (Dnevnik [Today's News], Croatian Radio & Television 1st Programme, June 5, 2007).2 Partial hope on the global warming theme was offered at the meeting of world leaders – from Britain, Canada, France, Italy, Japan, Russia and the United States – at Heiligendamm in June, 2007, when a considerable reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 50% by the year 2050 was agreed in keeping with German Chancellor Angela Merkel's proposal. What is historical to date in that agreement is that the United States of America has, for the very first time, accepted the formulation on major reduction and accepted to assume considerable accountability. True enough – and probably justifiably – Greenpeace remains sceptical about the entire matter.3 The following fact stands on the Winchester Marwell Zoological Park's web-page: "A census carried out in February 2000 found 22-27 individual Amur Leopards left in wild" ("Leopard, Amur", http).4 In this light, we could add that David Pimentel and Marcia Pimentel (2003: 660-663) show that "the meat-based food system requires more energy, land, and water resources than the lactoovovegetarian diet. In this limited sense, the lactoovovegetarian diet is more sustainable than the average American meat-based diet".5 According to data quoted by Juliet Gellatley (the book was published in 1996), there are 1.3 billion cattle in the world and each one of them produces at least 60 litres of methane per day, which gives a total amount of 100 million tonnes of methane each year (Gellatley 2001: 73).6 So the first chapter of Horner's book bears the title: "Green is the new red: the anti-American, anti-capitalist, and anti-human agenda of today's environmentalists" (Horner 2007: 3), by which the hunt for green witches was once again set in motion, while in the process he also pointed out that it was hardly by chance that Earth Day is marked on April 22, Lenin's birthday (ibid.: 171).7 Certain data from the above-mentioned documentary film reveals the effect of methane on global warming: "Methane gas is responsible for 18% of global warming, with the methane gas content of the atmosphere increasing by 1% per year." Further: "18% of world methane emissions are from livestock. There are more than 1.3 billion cattle in the world." This is followed by information relating to the UK: "26% of UK methane emissions are from livestock. UK livestock emissions contribute 1.15 million tonnes of methane to global warming every year" (Devour the Earth, The Vegetarian Society, UK, 1995).8 Bjørn Lomborg became widely known with his book The Skeptical Environmentalist (particularly after the book's publication in English in 2001) because of which, among other, he was accused of plagiarising certain data as well as of intentionally inaccurate interpretation of the findings of other researchers, in a word, of scientific dishonesty.9 Andrew K. Jorgenson emphasises that methane emissions are the second largest anthropogenic contributor to global warming, "one of the most pressing environmental issues facing all societies". He also states that, with few exceptions, social scientists ignore methane in their analyses of greenhouse gas emissions, "and those studies that do include methane often apply explanatory models that neglect important sector-level factors identified by researchers working in the earth sciences" (Jorgenson 2006: 1787).

Consequently, in their books, neither Lomborg nor Horner, and not even Al Gore – here, I must add that I find more acceptable Gore's line of thinking – give particular attention to methane and/or while Lomborg does not even include it in his Index, although he does, of course, mention it among greenhouse gases, Horner mentions it on only one page.10 Particularly in the United States and in Western Europe, transport and the production of energy are the leading participants in the emission of CO2. In that process, forest clearing by burning, particularly tropical forests that are largely located in less developed, southern regions of the world, is often forgotten or passed over in silence. As we have already pointed out, forests are burnt or cut down for the purpose of using the land to other ends, such as their conversion into productive pastures (for livestock) or for planting Soya and similar cultures (to be used as livestock feed), which have a much lower capacity of absorbing carbon dioxide than forests (Lay, Kufrin, Puđak 2007: 15).11 Namely, as established by Peter Singer: the anthropocentrism and theocentrism of Judaic-Christian ethics, besides preaching that only humans possess a soul, while animals do not, also sermonises that human beings are made in the image of God and that, consequently, God had given them the right to domination over animals: "All three taken together do have a very negative influence on the way in which we think about animals" (Peter Singer, cf. Morano, http).

12 The Animals' Angels, which was founded in March 1998 by Christa and Michael Blanke, acts as an internationally operating organisation with permanent teams for Germany, France, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Greece, Poland, Slovenia, Serbia, Romania, Hungary, Canada, the United States of America and Australia (cf. "Animal Transports", http).13 On the horrors to which animals are exposed during transport cf., for example, Singer 1998:124-125. Some die of injuries suffered in falls on the slippery loading ramps, some freeze during winter transport, others collapse from thirst and heat during summer, some suffocate under the pressure from other animals, who climb over them under the stress of loading into the overcrowded lorries, while other die of thirst and hunger from the stress caused by this appalling experience during transport to the abbatoirs.14 Steven M. Wise has pointed out that the majority of Western religions had ignored human rights: "Religion once sustained human slavery. It was wrong then. When it blindly sanctions the slavery of every nonhuman animal, it is wrong now" (Wise 2004: 24).15 Then again, Andrew Linzey assumes that Jesus was not a vegan and perhaps not even a vegetarian, adding that there are no notated examples in the Gospels that Jesus ate meat, except for the sole possible exception of Passover, although it is not clear that Jesus ate the traditional Passover repast. However, if we are to believe the stories from the Gospels, Jesus did eat fish, in connection with which Linzey poses the following question: "How are we to reconcile this to the established Christian view of Jesus as the Prince of Peace?", suggesting four possible answers (cf. Linzey 1995: 132-135).16 Richard D. Ryder has stated that in early Christianity "humankind's superiority over the other animal creation came to be regarded as almost synonymous with civilization itself, and those who behaved in an uncivilized way were dismissed as beast-like" (Ryder 2000: 28).17 That is why Christianity is more indifferent to the animal world than the Old Testament. Apart from that, Christian ethics ranks well below the concern level shown by Empedocles, Plutarch, and Porphyry (Visković 1996: 72, 413) in compassion and respect for the animal world. It should be added that, unlike Pythagoras, Plutarch did not base his vegetarianism on the idea of reincarnation "but upon a general duty of kindness to human and nonhuman alike. He argued that much of the world's cruelty arose from humankind's uncontrolled passion for meat" (Ryder 2000: 19).18 Cf. Peter Singer's stance on Christianity as an obstacle to animal rights, of which he spoke at the Animal Rights 2002 Conference in McLean, Va. (cf. Morano, http). Unlike Singer, for example, Rosemary Radford Ruether, a pioneer in Christian feminist theology, draws attention to the fact that deep ecologists and ecofeminists cite Christianity as the main source of the ecological crisis, precisely because of its anthropocentrism and androcentrism, by which the rule of the white male has been reinforced. Nonetheless, the above-mentioned ecofeminist and ecotheologist considers that the assertion that the Bible and Christianity are responsible for the destruction of Nature is an over-simplification and that "our present ecological crisis owes its major impetus to cultural, economic and technological developments of the last 500 years" (Radford Ruether 2003: 227).19 Andrew Linzey emphasises that 41 Anglican bishops signed a pledge in 1992 against the wearing of fur, while at the same time mentioning that Anglicans, similarly to the majority of Christians, are still not sufficiently open to the concern ethic in their stance towards animals, as opposed to their exploitation (cf. Linzey, http).20 I should mention one more paradox in the virtual host of them where Geocide is in question; more concretely, in this case it concerns zoocide. St Thomas Aquinas arbitrarily – and thus incorrectly – interpreted those lines from the Bible and said: "Wherefore it is not unlawful if man use plants for the good of animals, and animals for the good of man, as the Philosopher states (Polit. i, 3)" (St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, II; Question 64. Murder, Article 1. Whether it is unlawful to kill any living thing?; cf. Singer 1998: 162).21 So Andrew Linzey mentions the Rule of Life penned by St Benedict for his religious community that directly banned the eating of meat by all: "Except the sick who are very weak, let all abstain entirely from the flesh of four-footed animals" (Linzey 1995: 136).Among contemporary examples that argue in favour of the principles of ecotheology and animal theology, we should also mention the leading spokesperson in the Roman Catholic Church today promoting ecological justice based on God's Plan for Salvation that includes all of God's creatures. She is Sister Marjorie Keenan, Chief Consultant to the Papal Council for Justice and Peace (cf. Brnčić 2007: 74). In an article entitled For a More Just Relationship with Animals, printed in the December 7, 2000 issue of the Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, papal official Marie Hendrickx wrote that human "dominion" over the natural world does not mean indiscriminate killing and the infliction of needless suffering on animals (Patterson 2002: 21).22 Cf. the chapter entitled "Vegetarianism as a Biblical Ideal" in Andrew Linzey's book, Animal Theology.23 In an interview that introduced Richard Linzden to the Croatian public, the journalist Karmela Devčić also connected David Bellamy, the author of the BBC's documentary and, among others, environmental campaigner but also a global warming sceptic, with the faction of which Lindzen is a member. David Bellamy inexplicably believes that "if global warming should occur, it would be to the benefit of Humankind" (cf. Lindzen 2007: 72). It should be borne in mind that one of Lomborg's conclusions is that global warming is indeed taking place, but that it would (ostensibly) be cheaper and better to adapt to it than to reduce the

emission of carbon dioxide. There also exists an equally strange faction of scientists in Croatia who refute the actual facts about global warming; one of them is Velimir Pravdić, a member of the Academy and formerly, the laboratory head at the Center for Marine and Environmental Research of the "Ruđer Bošković" Institute (retd.) who, despite Lomborg's above-mentioned questionable scientific background as a "skeptical environmentalist", continues to believe in the authenticity of the data presented in Lomborg's book The Skeptical Environmentalist. Namely, Velimir Pravdić, who represents himself as one of the pioneers of environmental protection in Croatia, recently gave an interview to the Jutarnji list daily (on May 19, 2007) in which he stressed that he agreed completely with Lomborg's attitudes as given in his aforementioned book. Thus, despite the results published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Velimir Pravdić, our very own esteemed and skeptical environmentalist, is of the opinion that the cause of global warming is still – and despite everything – unknown! (Pravdić, http)24 Nonetheless, as established by the The Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (MNP), since 2007 China has replaced the United States as the leading carbon dioxide polluter ("China now no. 1...", http).25 Croatia signed the Kyoto Protocol on March 11, 1999. The Kyoto Protocol was adopted in 1997 and came into force on February 16, 2005. To date (April 27, 2007), it has been ratified by 170 State-members of the total 189 parties present at the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNNFCCC). At the time of writing of this text, Croatia had ratified the Kyoto Protocol on April 27, 2007; it will come into force for the Republic of Croatia 90 days from the date of lodging the document on ratification with the Protocol Depository, the Secretary-General of the United Nation, Ban Ki-moon (D.L. 2007: 11).26 Croatia is obliged to reduce its greenhouse gas emission by 5% in relation to the base figures of 1990 between 2008 and 2012. As a country in transition, whose industrial development would have slowed down considerably if it had accepted the limit set that year – of 31.12 million tonnes – Croatia has managed to secure resetting of the limit at 34.62 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions per annum ("Hrvatski sabor..."/ "The Croatian Parliament...", http).27 Although certain scientists question the possibility of future wars being fought over water, just as they have been and are fought in the 20th and the 21st century over "black gold", Vandana Shiva demonstrates that water has been the cause of past and present wars and conflicts, and then reveals that the World Bank has played a leading and very questionable role in creating shortages of water and its pollution, and how large international corporations (Monsanto, for example) are trying to establish their control over this profitable market.28 Ecologists expect religious organisations to discuss climate change from the viewpoint of Humankind's moral accountability for the living world (Lay, Kufrin, Puđak 2007: 73).

Bibliography

"Amur leopard". (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amur_Leopard).

"Animal Transports". (http :// www . animals - angels . org / Animal %20 Transports ,177. html ).

Ayres, Ed. 2000 (1999). God's Last Offer. Negotiating for a Sustainable Future. New

York, London – Four Walls Eight Windows.

Brnčić, Jadranka. 2007. "Životinje u Bibliji i biblijskoj duhovnosti". In: Kulturni bestijarij.

Edited by Suzana Marjanić and Antonija Zaradija Kiš. Zagreb: Biblioteka "Nova

etnografija", pp. 53-80.

Brook, Dan. "Meat Is Global Warming Issue".

(http://www.alternet.org/envirohealth/40639/).

"China now no. 1 in CO2 emissions; USA in second position".

(http:// www.mnp.nl/en/service/pressreleases/2007/20070619Chinanowno1inCO2emiss

ionsUSAinsecondposition.html).

"Clearing a Few Things Up for Al Gore"

(http://blog.peta.org/archives/2007/03/clearing_a_few.php?c=weekly_enews).

D.L. 2007. "Hrvatska je ratificirala Kyoto protokol". Eko revija: glasilo Fonda za zaštitu

okoliša i energetsku učinkovitost, No. 12: 11-13.

http://blog.peta.org/archives/2007/03/clearing_a_few.php?c=weekly_enews

"Draft of new international climate report warns of droughts, starvation, disease". (AP

IMPACT).

(http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/03/10/america/NA-GEN-US-Climate-

Report.php).

Eshel, Gidon, Pamela Martin. 2006. "Diet, Energy and Global Warming". Earth

Interactions, Vol. 10: 1-17.

(http://www.geosci.uchicago.edu/~gidon/papers/nutri/nutriEI.pdf

Friedrich, Bruce. "Food for Thought About Global Warming". (http://www.prijatelji-

zivotinja.hr/index.en.php?id=741).

"G8 assesses cost of species lost". (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/6456863.stm).

Gellatley, Juliet. 2001 (1996). Kako postati, biti i ostati vegetarijanac ili vegan? (The

Livewire Guide to Going, Being and Staying Veggie!). Zagreb: Udruga Prijatelji životinja.

"Globalno zatopljenje". (http://www.poslovni.hr/43890.aspx).

Gore, Al. 1994 (1992). Zemlja u ravnoteži: ekologija i ljudski duh. (Earth in Balance:

Ecology and the Human Spirit). Zagreb: Mladost.

Gore, Al. 2007 (2006). Neugodna istina: planetarna pojava globalnog zagrijavanja i što

u vezi s njom možemo poduzeti. (An Inconvenient Truth: Planetary Emergency of Global

Warming and What We Can Do About It). Zagreb: Algoritam.

Hoblaj, Moris, Danijela Vitković. 2007. "Cenzurirani biocentrizam". Zarez, April 5, 2007,

No. 203: 7.

Horner, Christopher C. 2007. The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to Global Warming and

Environmentalism. Washington: Regnery Publishing, Inc.

"Hrvatski sabor konačno ratificirao protokol iz Kyota".

(http://www.liby.info/category/globalno-zatopljenje/).

Jensen, Derrick. 2007. "Sve mora nestati". Zarez, March 8, 2007, No. 201: 18-19.

Jorgenson, Andrew K. 2006. "Global Warming and the Neglected Greenhouse Gas: A

Cross-National Study of the Social Causes of Methane Emissions Intensity, 1995". Social

Forces, Volume 84 (3): 1779-1798.

Jurić, Hrvoje. 2006. "Veliki ciljevi i mali koraci". Zarez, December 14, 2006, No. 194-195:

18-19.

Khan, Sarah. 2005 (2003). Čudesne životinje: činjenice i zanimljivosti. (Amazing Animal

Facts and Lists). Split: Marjan tisak.

Lay, Vladimir, Krešimir Kufrin, Jelena Puđak. 2007. Kap preko ruba čaše: klimatske

promjene i Hrvatska. Zagreb: Hrvatski centar "Znanje za okoliš".

http://www.geosci.uchicago.edu/~gidon/papers/nutri/nutriEI.pdf

http://www.liby.info/category/globalno-zatopljenje/

http://www.poslovni.hr/43890.aspx

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/6456863.stm

http://www.prijatelji-zivotinja.hr/index.en.php?id=741

http://www.prijatelji-zivotinja.hr/index.en.php?id=741

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/03/10/america/NA-GEN-US-Climate-Report.php

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/03/10/america/NA-GEN-US-Climate-Report.php

"Leopard, Amur. (Panthera pardus orientalis)".

( http :// marwell . org . uk / marwell _ zoo / zoo _ guide / animal _ detail . asp ?

id =105& letter = L & css =1) .

Lindzen, Richard. 2007. "Priče o globalnom zatopljenju su laž!". Globus, July 27, 2007,

pp. 70-73.

Linzey, Andrew. 1995 (1994). Animal Theology. Urbana and Chicago: University of

Illinois Press.

Linzey, Andrew. "Christianity and Animals". An Interview with Andrew Linzey. By Rynn

Berry. Satya. (http://www.satyamag.com/feb96/linzey.html).

Lomborg, Bjørn. 2001 (1998). The Skeptical Environmentalist. Measuring the Real State

of the World. Cambridge University Press.

Mason, Jim. 2006. "Uncovering the Roots of Our Domination of Nature and Each Other".

In: Igniting a Revolution! Voices in Defense of Mother Earth. Edited by Steven Best and

Anthony J. Nocella, II. Edinburgh, Oakland, West Virginia: AK Press: 178-185.

Morano, Marc. "Christianity Harmful to Animals, Says Animal Rights Godfather". (http://

www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=%5CCulture%5Carchive

%5C200207%5CCUL20020701b.html).

"Najveća ekološka katastrofa u povijesti Libanona". (http :// www . zamirzine . net / spip . php ?

page = print & id _ article =3880 ).

Patterson, Charles. 2002. Eternal Treblinka. Our Treatment of Animals and the

Holocaust. New York. Lantern Books.

Peraica, Vjekoslav. 2003. "Uloga crkava u konstrukciji državotvornih mitova Hrvatske i

Srbije. Historijski mitovi na Balkanu".

(http://www.iis.unsa.ba/posebna/mitovi/mitovi_perica.htm).

Petrovčić, Gordana. 2007. "Zaštita okoliša postaje politička top tema". Vjesnik, March 3

and 4, 2007, pp. 10-11.

Pimentel, David, Marcia Pimentel. 2003. "Sustainability of meat-based and plant-based

diets and the environment". The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Volume 78

(3): 660-663.

Pravdić, Velimir. "Zapravo, nitko ne zna zašto se mijenja klima". (http://www.jutarnji.hr/

magazin/clanak/art-2007,5,19,razgovor_pravdic,75042.jl).

"Protokol iz Kyota". (http://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protokol_iz_Kyota).

Radford Ruether, Rosemary. 2003. "Ecological Theology: Roots in Tradition, Liturgical

and Ethical Practice for Today". Dialog: A Journal of Theology, Volume 42 (3): 226-234.

http://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protokol_iz_Kyota

http://www.jutarnji.hr/magazin/clanak/art-2007,5,19,razgovor_pravdic,75042.jl

http://www.jutarnji.hr/magazin/clanak/art-2007,5,19,razgovor_pravdic,75042.jl

http://www.zamirzine.net/spip.php?page=print&id_article=3880

http://www.zamirzine.net/spip.php?page=print&id_article=3880

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=\Culture\archive\200207\CUL20020701b.html



http://www.satyamag.com/feb96/linzey.html

Ryder, Richard D. 2000. Animal Revolution. Changing Attitudes towards Speciesism.

Oxford, New York: Basil Blackwell Ltd.

Shiva, Vandana. 2006 (2002). Ratovi za vodu: privatizacija, zagađivanje i profit (Water

Wars: Pollution, Profits and Privatization). Zagreb: DAF.

Singer, Peter. 1998 (1975). Oslobođenje životinja. (Animal Liberation: A New Ethic for

Our Treatment of Animals). Zagreb: Ibis grafika.

Solomon, Norman. 2003. "Judaism". In: The Animal Ethics Reader. Edited by Susan J.

Armstrong and Richard G. Botzler. London and New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis

Group: 222-22

Šimleša, Dražen. 2006. Četvrti svjetski rat: globalni napad na život./ Drugačiji svijet je

moguć: priče iz našeg dvorišta. Zagreb: Što čitaš?

Visković, Nikola. 1996. Životinja i čovjek: prilog kulturnoj zoologiji. Split: Književni krug.

Walsh, Bryan. 2007. "Getting Credit for Saving Trees. Forest cover is a natural defense

against global warming. Let's pay to preserve it". Time, July 23, 2007, p. 46.

Wise, Steven M. 2004. "Animal Rights, One Step at a Time". In: Animal Rights: Current

Debates and New Directions. Edited by Cass R. Sunstein and Martha C. Nussbaum.

Oxford University Press: 19-50.

Zerzan, John. Age of Grief. (http://www.primitivism.com/age-of-grief.htm).

Biographical Statement

Suzana Marjanić (Ph.D.) is on the staff of the Institute of Ethnology and Folklore

Research in Zagreb (Croatia), where she realises her interests in mythic themes in oral

literature, folk religion and beliefs, cultural botany, cultural zoology, animal rights,

ecofeminism and theatre/performance art anthropology. Along with articles on the above

themes, she has also published a book entitled Glasovi "Davnih dana": transgresije

svjetova u Krležinim zapisima 1914.-1921/1922. [Voices from "Bygone Days":

transgressions of the worlds in Krleža's diary entries 1914-1921/1922] (Naklada MD,

Zagreb, 2005).

http://www.primitivism.com/age-of-grief.htm

Global Protest against Geocide

Documents

Transcript of Global Protest against Geocide